Why Does It Surprise Anyone That Obama Lies? If His Lips Are Moving, He Is Lying! This Time His Lying Will Have Disastrous Results To The Middle East And Israel.

Obama Hid Intel Estimates of True Iran Nuclear Breakout Time

By Ahuva Balofsky April 24, 2015 , 8:00 am

10 9

0 1Email 30Share

“For God shall bring every work into the judgment concerning every hidden thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil.” (Ecclesiastes 12:14)

image: http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/barack-obama-6.jpg

(Photo: Official White House Photo/ Pete Souza)

US President Barack Obama has known for years that Iran is just months away from a nuclear bomb, yet kept it to himself until it was convenient, reported Bloomberg Tuesday.

According to the report, the Obama administration has long estimated a two- to three-month breakout time, yet only declassified this information April 1, “just in time for the White House to make the case for its Iran deal to Congress and the public”.

Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz acknowledged to the news agency that the US has known for “quite some time” that Iran is closer to a bomb than the administration has let on. He added that Iran is “right now spinning, I mean enriching with 9,400 centrifuges out of their roughly 19,000. Plus all the . . . . R&D work. If you put that together it’s very, very little time to go forward. That’s the 2-3 months” estimated for Iran to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon.

Yet all this time, Obama has insisted that Iran was not nearly that close to achieving a nuclear bomb. Back in 2013, before a visit to Israel, Obama told Israel’s Channel Two, “Right now, we think it would take over a year or so for Iran to actually develop a nuclear weapon, but obviously we don’t want to cut it too close.”

That same year, in an effort to downplay Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s more alarmist estimate of six months, Obama told the Associated Press in October, “Our assessment continues to be a year or more away. And in fact, actually, our estimate is probably more conservative than the estimates of Israeli intelligence services.”

David Albright, a former weapons inspector and president of the Institute for Science and International Security, told Eli Lake at Bloomberg that he felt the administration was being intentionally vague in 2013.

“They weren’t clear at all about what this one-year estimate meant, but people like me who said let’s break it down to the constituent pieces in terms of time to build a bomb were rebuffed,” he said. Albright and his group came up with their own estimate, measuring only the production of highly enriched uranium, concluding that Iran was a mere month away.

A spokeswoman for the National Security Council downplayed Albright’s numbers to USA Today, saying the intelligence community maintains “a number of assessments” of the time Iran needs to become a nuclear threat.

Albright’s position, however, is supported by leaked International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) document, first published by the Associated Press in 2009. It concluded Iran “has sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable implosion nuclear device based upon (highly enriched uranium) as the fission fuel.”

image: http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/wp-content/uploads/useful_banner_manager_banners/82-Iranium-600WIDE.jpg

Kenneth Pollack, a former CIA analyst who is now an Iran expert at the Brookings Institution, told Lake that estimating breakout times is an imprecise business. “The idea there is such a thing as a hard and fast formula for this is nonsense,” he said. “All the physicists come up with different answers depending on what inputs they use.” This makes Obama’s manipulative use of a foreshortened timeline all the more sinister.

On April 2, Obama identified one benefit of the nuclear framework deal, saying, “even if it violated the deal, for the next decade at least, Iran would be a minimum of a year away from acquiring enough material for a bomb.”

Representative Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence doesn’t buy it. “We’ve been researching [the administration’s] claim that a deal would lengthen the breakout time for Iran from two to three months to a year,” he told Lake. “We’re just trying to confirm any of their numbers and we can’t confirm or make sense of what they are referencing.”

Israel has consistently maintained that a nuclear Iran is a dire threat to the security of the entire world, and that successive US agreements with the Islamic Republic have put Israel in grave danger. Netanyahu has said on numerous occasions that “Israel will not allow Iran to develop a military nuclear capability,” or endanger Israeli citizens.

Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/37299/obama-hid-intel-estimates-of-true-iran-nuclear-breakout-time-middle-east/#IZyxgK3VzTmtdf4s.99

For Those American Jews Who Thought Obama Was The Second Coming, They Just Learned That Obama Does Not Care About Them Or Israel. As Far As He Is Concerned, If Israel Disappeared Tomorrow, It Would Make The World A Better Place!

Honey, I Shrunk the Jews!

Why did Obama send a lowly vice-presidential adviser to inform American Jewish leadership about his Iran deal?

By Lee Smith|April 8, 2015 12:00 AM|Comments

PrintEmail

Share6 Tweet12 0 0

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at AIPAC, March, 2014 in Washington, DC. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Liberal American Jewish Psyche in Crisis

Can Zionism and U.S. liberalism coexist under Netanyahu?

By Nathan Perl-Rosenthal

For Obama, Iran Talks Are Also About Testing the Limits of American Jewish Power

In Washington, the president and his allies are using the nuclear issue to drive a wedge between Israel and its U.S. interlocutors

By Lee Smith

The Obama-Bibi Split Is About Policy, Not Protocol—And It May Be Permanent

Why the dust-up about Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s March 3 speech to a joint meeting of Congress may outlast the leader

By Matthew Duss

Almost as soon as the White House reached the nuclear framework agreement with Iran, it began sending out senior administration officials to brief domestic allies and rivals in order to sell the deal. The president himself called Speaker of the House John Boehner, while National Security Adviser Susan Rice and U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power got other legislators on the phone. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz made the administration’s case for the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Agreement over the weekend on the Sunday talk shows. Guess who didn’t get briefed.

Well, not exactly. Key Jewish community leaders did get a briefing—not from the president or the secretary of state or the national security adviser, but from Joe Biden’s National Security Adviser Colin Kahl. One participant told CNN that the call went smoothly. “There were definitely pointed questions,” said the source, “but it was very respectful.”

Maybe CNN’s source was biting his tongue, or perhaps he just doesn’t get the joke. Kahl was the administration official who removed the recognition of Jerusalem as capital of Israel from the 2012 Democratic platform. And it was as a scholar at the Washington, D.C.-based think tank Center for New American Security that Kahl floateda 2013 trial balloon hinting that the administration’s policy was, contrary to President Barack Obama’s promises, not prevention of an Iranian nuclear bomb but containment and deterrence of it. As it turns out, this was the exact same policy Kahl outlined to American Jewish leaders last week, in what amounts in policy circles to a victory lap.

It’s a pretty nasty joke the White House played. But even if Kahl didn’t have a long personal history as the administration’s point man on the downgrade Israel beat, the fact that Obama sent the vice president’s aide to brief Jewish leaders on an issue of vital concern to them suggests how little the commander in chief now respects or fears the power of a community he once courted so assiduously. For instance, there was the famous 2009 conference call during which he told a gathering of community leaders that it was in the best interests of Israel as well as the United States to put some “daylight” between the White House and Jerusalem. Having been warned nearly six years ago, in person, it should hardly come as a surprise to those same American Jewish leaders that it’s now daytime.

The vanishing political import of the American Jewish community appears to have taken least some of its leaders—used to Oval Office sit-downs and plenty of concerned hand-holding—by surprise. But you can bet it didn’t take Obama six years to comprehend the political import of James Baker’s famous observation about the Jewish community’s voting patterns. If, as the former secretary of state once said, “F— the Jews; they don’t vote for us anyway,” Obama saw the flip-side of Baker’s crude insight: The president could stick it to the Jews, since they’d vote for Democrats no matter what.

Obama was able to hammer away at AIPAC and the pro-Israel lobby largely because the liberal segments of the Jewish community found it convenient to believe that Obama’s target was just Benjamin Netanyahu, the stubborn and arrogant right-wing prime minister who drove decent people crazy. Sure, Bibi speaks proper English and went to MIT. But he built housing in settlements, he didn’t end the occupation, he stopped pretending to negotiate with a partner who also stopped being willing to pretend to negotiate, and then he made public his disagreement about Obama’s Iran deal, and spoke to Congress, to boot. Whatever stresses existed in the American-Israeli relationship were clearly Bibi’s fault. If he stopped being such a jerk, then good American Jewish liberals like themselves would all be eating latkes in the White House again.

What these community leaders seemed not to have fully understood is that American Jewish political power is linked not just to the financial power of Jewish donors or the influence of Jewish voters in a few key cities but more fundamentally to the strategic importance of the American-Israel relationship. What they certainly did not see is that tension with Bibi served Obama very nicely in a much bigger strategic move, which was the main aim of Obama’s Middle East policy since 2009: namely, to downgrade the U.S. alliance with Israel in order to make room for America’s new can-do regional partner, Iran.

The hardly coincidental byproduct of Obama’s dramatic and far-reaching Middle East realignment is that the American Jewish community is getting a down-grade. The irony of course is that the more distance the American Jewish community puts between themselves and the Jewish national homeland, the less they matter to anybody on either side of the American political divide or in Israel. That’s just basic political math. The fact that the American Jewish community flunked its political math test is why the White House sent Colin Kahl to deal with Jewish community leaders—as far as Obama is concerned, it’s addition by subtraction.

***

Lee Smith is a senior editor at the Weekly Standard and a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. He is also the author of the recently published The Consequences of Syria.

Iranians Know That They Are Going To Make A Great Deal For Themselves.

IRANIAN FOREIGN MINISTER 'ALL SMILES'

BY | APRIL 2, 2015 · 12:00 AM

↓ Jump to Comments

Author(s):  Adam Kredo
Source:  freebeacon.com.     Article date: April 1st, 2015

Javad Zarif/AP

LAUSANNE, Switzerland—Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister, said late Wednesday that he is “all smiles” as talks with Western powers over the country’s nuclear weapons program run past a self-imposed deadline and Tehran pushes the United States to make more concessions.

When asked by a reporter whether he was feeling less optimistic following tension in the negotiating room, Zarif responded, “I am all smiles.”

Zarif also demanded that negotiators stop pressuring him and the Iranian side lest the talks stall without an agreement.

“Any agreement and pressure will not go together,” Zarif said. “They are mutually exclusive. So our friends need to decide whether they want to be with Iran based on respect or that they want to continue based on pressure. They have tested the other one. It’s high time to test this one.”

Secretary of State John Kerry will remain in town until Thursday morning in a bid to patch over remaining disagreements with Iran over what an initial political agreement will look like.

The extension in talks appeared to rile Western reporters and opened questions about just how many concessions Iran is angling to receive.

Details of that agreement remain vague and U.S. officials are discussing few details ahead of any announcement.

Meanwhile, U.S. allies such as Israel and Saudi Arabia have continued to express reservations about reported concessions the United States is making concerning the size and scope Iran’s nuclear program going forward.

These include Iran’s refusal to export its stockpiles of enriched uranium, the key component in a nuclear weapon.

President Obama on late Tuesday held a video conference with Kerry and other senior U.S. officials to discuss the ongoing talks.

Obama “convened a secure video teleconference with members of his national security team to discuss the P5+1 negotiations with Iran,” said Bernadette Meehan, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council, in a statement. “The president received an update on the current status of the negotiations from Secretaries Kerry and Moniz and other members of the negotiating team in Lausanne, Switzerland, and thanked the team for their continuing efforts.”

On Earth Day--Obama And Minions Create Tons Of Carbon Emissions To Promote Global Warming

Earth Day Shrieking And Government Hypocrisy

April 23, 2014 by Sam Rolley

 5 0

 0 9

THINKSTOCK

Yesterday was Earth Day. Some Americans likely celebrated by picking up litter or making a conscious effort to reduce the amount of waste they produce, a few others protested the Keystone pipeline and some shrieked breathlessly about how we’re all going to die if global warming doesn’t end.

The Huffington Post declared yesterday that this year’s Earth Day marks a frightening milestone for the planet: The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been consistently more than 400 parts per million for the past month.

Via Huff Post Green:

“This is higher than it’s been in millions of years,” said Pieter Tans, a senior scientist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics Laboratory.

Parts per million, or ppm, is a measure of the ratio of carbon dioxide to other gases in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is just one type of greenhouse gas that has been found to trap heat, but it is the primary one emitted from human activities and it lingers in the atmosphere for a very long time. There is typically seasonal fluctuation in the parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide, according to scientists who track the levels. That explains why, after hitting 400 for the first time in recorded history last May, the levels declined soon after. But they hit 400 ppm again in mid-March, and have stayed above that level for all of April.

The news outlet also featured an article from Climate Central, an organization devoted to talking about climate change, which warns of how much hotter the U.S. is now that during the first Earth Day in 1970.

From the piece:

Average temperatures across most of the continental U.S. have been rising gradually for more than a century, at a rate of about 0.127°F per decade between 1910-2012. That trend parallels an overall increase in average global temperatures, which is largely the result of human greenhouse gas emissions. …

Since then, every state’s annual average temperature has risen accordingly. On average, temperatures in the contiguous 48 states have been warming at a rate of 0.48°F per decade since 1970, nearly twice the global average.

Commenters quickly added a little common sense to the alarmist write-up, noting things like: “They were concerned about global cooling during the first Earth Day, because it was colder than ‘normal.’ Guess what, no matter what the current temperature is, it’s ‘normal’ to the earth. We’re the ones with issues.”

Meanwhile, the White House set about sending Administration officials to join “Americans around the country to talk about our environmental and climate challenges” to mark Earth Day.

“Secretary of Energy Ernie Moniz and EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy will be at the New England Aquarium talking about what climate change will mean for Boston Harbor. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack is at Drake University in Des Moines, discussing how climate change is going to impact our farms and our food supply,” the White House announced.

Each of those officials presumably earned a hefty slice of carbon guilt for the amount of fuel expended so that they could go tell Americans how using fuel is killing fish and farms. But it’s safe to assume that none of their travels produced as much carbon as President Barack Obama used as he traveled to Washington State and then overnight to Tokyo.

National Review’s Jim Geraghty did the math:

[F]lying from Washington, D.C. to Washington state — 2,328 miles, generating 568,032 pounds of carbon emissions at 244 pounds per mile — and then beginning his week-long trip to Asia, flying tonight to Tokyo — 4,792 miles, an additional 1,169,248 pounds of carbon emissions. The two trips add up to 1.73 million pounds of carbon or 868.64 tons.

For perspective, the average American generates about 19 tons of carbon dioxide in one year.

This figure does not count the carbon emissions from the president’s backup plane, cargo planes transporting the president’s limo and helicopter, advance staff, etc.

It seems there is a lot of hot air floating around after all.